The Technology of Neuromancer After 25 Years 203
William Gibson's Neuromancer was first published 25 years ago. Dr_Ken writes with an excerpt from an article at MacWorld that delves into the current state of some of the technology that drives the book: "'Neuromancer is important because of its astounding predictive power. Gibson's core idea in the novel is the direct integration of man and computer, with all the possibilities (and horrors) that such a union entails. The book eventually sold more than 160 million copies, but bringing the book to popular attention took a long time and a lot of word-of-mouth. The sci-fi community, however, was acutely aware of the novel's importance when it came out: Neuromancer ran the table on sci-fi's big three awards in 1984, winning the Hugo Award, the Philip K. Dick Memorial Award, and the Nebula Award.'"
The Theme (Score:2, Interesting)
Gibson's core idea in the novel is the direct integration of man and computer, with all the possibilities (and horrors) that such a union entails
It's been a few months since I read it but I remember the humans staying human all the way to the end.
Might read this again (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone know if the other two related stories are any good (Mono Lisa Overdrive, and Count Zero)?
Pay Phones (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry, I enjoyed Neuromancer as much as anyone. However, you can't talk about what Gibson got right without talking about what he missed... most interestingly he missed the invention of mobile phones and so pay phones make an appearance in the book.
Re:160 million copies!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Pay Phones (Score:1, Interesting)
Yeah, right. As if a prediction is only correct if it doesn't miss a single detail. I have always seen Neuromancer as the perfect prediction of the future of technology. Even now, there's things in the book that haven't come true yet, but will eventually, if not shorltly. VR is one of them - think of html5 on a VR headset - and computers that talk intelligently is another.
Re:160 million copies!? (Score:4, Interesting)
Can the attitude and pay your respect, boy. (Score:5, Interesting)
This is the man who coined the term "cyberspace"--first in "Johnny Mnemonic" in his 1982 Burning Chrome collection and popularized in Neuromancer--and imagined the representation of information as virtual/geographic landscapes. All of it pounded out using a manual typewriter. This 15-year-old interview [wordyard.com] may give you some sense of why Gibson's novel will probably matter more than any cultural artifact you or I will ever create.
Re:160 million copies!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:160 million copies!? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I didn't think it was that good (Score:3, Interesting)
I read Neuromancer and Pattern Recognition on similar advice. I disliked both, but probably for very different reasons. (I also read his collaboration with Bruce Sterling, The Difference Engine, and though I won't say I disliked it, I also wasn't impressed by it; I simply didn't feel strongly about it either way.)
My problem with William Gibson is an impression I get from him: That he is a popular-press reporter, trying desperately to be "hip" and "relevant," and writing about subjects about which he knows rather little. As I read his work, I feel assaulted by cultural references which do nothing to advance the plot or set to mood; it's all just so much 'name-dropping' on Gibson's part.
Basically, they read to me like they're intended neither to enlighten nor to entertain, but only to make a name for William Gibson as a guy who "gets it."
You may be surprised to hear this in the next sentence, but I love a lot of Neal Stephenson's work -- particularly Cryptonomicon and The Diamond Age. Now, that man's ego definitely fills his writing. But he knows what he's talking about, and you get the feeling that he's writing the story that he wants to write and not the story that he thinks will use the right buzzwords to generate attention.
(I cannot stand his Baroque Cycle though. I'm thinking he jumped the shark with Quicksilver.)
I don't know if this has been the most coherent post. I find it hard to articulate the feeling I get when I read Gibson's stuff that turns me off to him. But it's there, and every time I forget that I don't like Gibson's writing and I pick up one of his books on someone's advice, I am annoyed and disappointed.
Re:The Theme (Score:3, Interesting)
Gibson's core idea in the novel is the direct integration of man and computer, with all the possibilities (and horrors) that such a union entails
It's been a few months since I read it but I remember the humans staying human all the way to the end.
They weren't human to begin with. Not a one of them, except, perhaps, the Finn and Maelcum.
Case, Molly, Armitage, Riviera, 3jane, Dixie Flatline - not a human in the bunch, all of them creatures - monsters - of the Information Age dystopia Gibson envisioned.
It was kind of the point of the book.
Re:Amazon, here I come! (Score:3, Interesting)
[[NOTICE: THIS IS NOT FLAMEBAIT--at least it isn't meant to be]]
Actually, about all I remember about this novel other than the space station is that it was incredibly boring all the way to the even more boring space station sequence at the end: Gee, let's describe a trip on a miniature railroad in even more detail than Zelazny's descriptions of hellrides. Yes, it may have been prescient. But could it not have been readable too? Sorry, but I grew up reading Asimov, and enjoyed it, though he wasn't half as prescient. SF is escapist fiction with a little futuristic science thrown in. It's not supposed to be Scientific American Time Travel Edition. Oh well, mod me down if you wish.
Re:The Theme (Score:3, Interesting)
No, I mean they really weren't human. They are fully realized and empathetic characters, but they really, really weren't like you or I. Their existence was so intertwined with technology, they did not have the same perspective or motivations that ordinary humans do. (Which is a major theme in the book - humans transformed into something else by their circumstances.)
And yes, they were monsters - murderous and dangerous - and made that way by their integration with technology even more than their economic circumstance and amorality.
Armitage's personality was by default artificial, Riviera used his technology to indulge his sadistic whims, Molly was used to murder people for sexual gratification while her mind was asleep, Case felt crippled and desperate when he couldn't use his communion with the machine to rob, steal or destroy, Dixie was alive without a body, a virtual soul to be used as a tool in his digital afterlife, and 3jane was downright alien in her decadence. These are some seriously frightening individuals in seriously scary circumstances.
This is what makes the book awesome, tho, so it's not a complaint or condemnation.
Re:I didn't think it was that good (Score:5, Interesting)
> That he is a popular-press reporter, trying desperately to be "hip" and "relevant," and writing about subjects about which he knows rather little.
> You may be surprised to hear this in the next sentence, but I love a lot of Neal Stephenson's work [...]
Not so much. While they work with similar themes, I think their writing style is quite different.
William Gibson is much more terse and relies on cultural references ('name-dropping') for setting the scene. The story evolves more around such scene descriptions, than a particular sequence of actions.
As you seem to find those scene descriptions rather pretentious, it is hardly surprising, that you dislike his works. But quite frankly, I like sentences with such references like:
In my opinion, Neal Stephenson writes more approachable. I feel more involved. His writing seems to me less constructed and more flowing. But to me it also seems his down-side: The plot seems a bit unplanned, getting out of hand, the ending somewhat hurried.
Re:Might read this again (Score:3, Interesting)
Exactly. The parts of the novel which make little sense on first reading quite literally read like a series of fleeting impressions, experienced by the main character (Case, in this book). It's a great way of putting the reader in the action.
You know ONLY what the main character knows and no more - you don't get to cheat with help from the Explaining Narrator.
Re:Might read this again (Score:2, Interesting)
I think there are two kinds of readers in regards to this. I'm also a big fan of Glen Cook's _Black Company_ series of fantasy/sword and sorcery books. One of the things I love about his books, like I do about Gibson's, are the lack of explanations about various things in the world. They use evocative names which might give an inkling of meaning and you have to pick the rest up from context. I'm rereading the Cook books right now and spent some time reading the Amazon reviews. 2 groups of people. Those who hated the books because they felt lost and those who liked the books for the very same reason.
Re:Derms (Score:3, Interesting)
Everybody keeps neglecting his use of derms to deliver drugs. Yet, the first "patch" I saw widely in use was the anti-smoking patches in the mid-90's.
Interestingly, I did recently come across it as a delivery mechanism for illegal psychedelic drugs also - definitely the first time I've seen that. The "sales pitch" for it was that it'd give you a longer trip, since it absorbs more slowly in to the system. Basically it's (purported to be) about 4 trips worth of LSD, but given at a rate of approximately 1 per 4 hours, so you'd come up at a pretty slow rate, but eventually reach the intensity of about one and a half trips, and then remain at that state for close to a day and a half before it finally wears off (unlike a traditional trip that might be gone in 6 to 8 hours or so). They physically appear to be based on a nicotine patch as far as I can tell.
Needless to say, I bought 3. They're still sitting in a drawer at home (appropriately protected from moisture of course), since I'm waiting for the right weekend to have it along with a couple of friends, and we haven't yet found a weekend where we're all free (too much work and other social life getting in the way!).
(in case they turn out to be complete duds, I've got some regular tabs as well, so it'll only mean I'm out of pocket 90 euro for the three - no big loss)
I'll probably be posting my experience of it on Erowid or elsewhere at some point within the coming months.